Stamp Community Family of Web Sites
Thousands of stamps, consistently graded, competitively priced and hundreds of in-depth blog posts to read
Stamp Community Forum
 
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

Welcome Guest! Need help? Got a question? Inherit some stamps?
Our stamp forum is completely free! Register Now!

Show Your US 1851-57 Imperforate Stamps

Previous Page | Next Page    
 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous TopicReplies: 1,882 / Views: 83,221Next Topic
Page: of 126
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
United States
1919 Posts
Posted 11/28/2021   6:30 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Classic Coins to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply

Quote:
What characteristics are leading you to Plate 6 vs Plate 7 or others?

Hi Harper1249,

It wasn't a set of general characteristics that led me to plate 6. When I compared your 1856 stamp with compressed Chase photos from plates 4, 6, and 7, my short list of candidate positions didn't include any from plate 4 or 7. All candidates were on the right pane of plate 6. The full short-list that I worked with was; 11R6, 55R6, 56R6, 61R6, 65R6, 70R6, 77R6, and 87R6. I haven't ruled out all of the other seven positions, but 61R6 seems to be the best fit using the frame line traits that I noted.

I stated before that the GD should show if your stamp is from 61R6, but now I'm thinking that this isn't necessarily true. Your stamp seems to show handling wear, giving the edges a slightly rough appearance, so I think it's possible that if there was a trace of the GD when the stamp was severed from the sheet, it could have worn off from handling.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
2460 Posts
Posted 11/29/2021   03:00 am  Show Profile Check sinclair2010's eBay Listings Bookmark this reply Add sinclair2010 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Harper, Despite the stamp being misidentified on the Philly cover, I think you did well as long as you spent less than $125 or so on it. The chances of the stamp not being EOB are pretty slim.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
Learn More...
United States
74 Posts
Posted 11/29/2021   11:20 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Harper1249 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
I'm not worried about the cost. I found this letter while going through boxes of my grandfathers collection. It was in with a bunch of foreign covers. The brunt of his collection was sold in Rumsey's 2020 auction. His bread and butter was airmail/zepplins and his passion was Heligoland but he collected all things stamp related and there is a lot to still go through that didn't make the auction. If any of you are out of Oklahoma City, you might have known him. His name was Robert "Bob" Pollard. He collected all his life from 1920s through 1990s.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
Learn More...
United States
74 Posts
Posted 11/29/2021   9:15 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Harper1249 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Thank you Classic Coins and Ioagoa for your help with these 3c stamps and thanks to all others who have provided insight as well. The experience and knowledge you all share here is amazing and inspiring. It's definitely inpsired me to pursue plating. So i'm off to learn about experimental orange brown inks and try out compression techniques on some of my others. Thanks again for all the help.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
United States
1919 Posts
Posted 11/30/2021   9:29 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Classic Coins to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
You're welcome, Harper1249.

The experimental orange brown variety that ioagoa discussed frequently has waxy-looking ink, like the EOB example at left below, compared to a #10A at right. The waxy inking of some experimental orange browns usually results in poorly-defined details. Waxy-looking ink can occur with other #11/11A colors, though, so this characteristic can't be used alone to confirm the EOB variety.

Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
1041 Posts
Posted 12/01/2021   10:45 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add jaxom100 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Can someone check out the plate position for this stamp. It is in the Stamp Smarter database as 42R5L but I do not think that it is correct, I may be wrong. The right side compression looks good but the left side does not seem to match to me.


Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
United States
252 Posts
Posted 12/02/2021   12:32 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add ioagoa to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Hi Jaxom100 --

That 42R5L is my stamp -- and I have just now "re-confirmed" it as being correctly plated. As an aside -- it was originally plated by Chase -- came from an ex Phil Rose plating -- and was further confirmed by Dick Celler years ago.

I think that differences in inking, impression, and plate wear might be at play with this stamp versus the other compressed images you are using for comparison. Plus, with the Chase photos, you have to further consider the impact of focus and exposure. For an example of what I mean -- my stamp is likely a very early printing impression -- (as evidenced by the fine lines surrounding the center dots of the rosettes -- which were among the very first parts of the design to show wear not too long after the plate was put into production). Against that backdrop -- using the "full-sized" scans -- if you look at the upper end of the LIL on my stamp -- you can see that it noticeably weakens as it approaches the ULR -- and although weak -- it clearly runs up to a point where it touches one -- or possibly two -- of the dots in the outer ring of the ULR -- versus the Chase stamp where -- due to either inking, impression, plate wear or photo quality -- the upper end of the LIL is barely perceptible and appears to stop short of the ULR.

Also, as I mentioned in one of my prior posts -- based on my experience, the utilization of compressed images -- while a very powerful plating aid -- also has its limitations.

For example -- compressed images can be significantly distorted (and thus misleading) if the frame lines of the stamp in the original source scan are not as close to horizontal or vertical as possible before compression (i.e., perfectly aligned on the "X / Y axis"). More significantly, if the stamp was torn, or not flat on the scanner, or if there were bends in the paper when scanned, frame line curves can be distorted (or artificially introduced) on the compressed image that are not true to the position. In other words -- if the stamp in the original source scan is tilted at an angle -- or has any paper bends, creases, or tears -- or is not perfectly flat on the scanner for any other reason -- the resulting compressed image will be distorted for purposes of comparability with other patient stamps from the same plate position -- and consequently, potentially misleading. I can tell you that my stamp is completely flat -- but we have no way of knowing if the Chase stamp -- or the other example in your composite have a minor bend along the left side?

In any event, I am 100% confident that my stamp is correctly plated as 42R5L.

Happy to discuss further if you like.

Regards // ioagoa
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
United States
1919 Posts
Posted 12/02/2021   01:12 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Classic Coins to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Hi jaxom100,

As an experienced user of the vertically-compressed image technique and, if I'm not mistaken, the first to show it on SCF several years ago, it is my opinion that the compressed composite image you posted to question the 42R5L plating soundly proved that the plating is correct. Factoring in progressive plate wear and trivial slight variations due to paper bends, I assess it to be a perfect match.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Edited by Classic Coins - 12/02/2021 02:27 am
Pillar Of The Community
United States
1041 Posts
Posted 12/02/2021   01:25 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add jaxom100 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Thanks guys. I am just trying my best not to make any errors in my charts.

Any idea who owns the stamps in the database that are the ones used by Chase in his images? There are 13 on the left pane of plate 5 late and 17 in the first 50 on the right pane.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
United States
252 Posts
Posted 12/03/2021   12:28 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add ioagoa to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Hi Jaxom100 --


Quote:
Any idea who owns the stamps in the database that are the ones used by Chase in his images? There are 13 on the left pane of plate 5 late and 17 in the first 50 on the right pane.


Those ex-Chase photo stamps from plate 5L are mine -- and there are actually 22 from the left pane and 34 from the right pane posted up to the StampSmarter database. (I think some of them might be in the #2 or #3 slots which is likely why your count is off).

Interesting story about these -- as I stumbled onto them in 2014 when I purchased a bulk lot of 1851 - 1857 imperforate 3-cent plating material at a NY stamp show. The dealer told me that the stamps were some of the "remainders" from the estate of Phil Rose -- a well known 3-cent collector who resided in Centereach, NY. The dealer did not know that any of the stamps in the lot were ex-Chase photo stamps -- and neither did I until a few years later when I finally got around to working through the group. You can imagine my surprise when I went to confirm the plating on one of the stamps and realized that the stamp in front of me was "THE" stamp from the Smithsonian photographs. There were roughly 1,500 stamps in the bulk lot -- and in addition to the 56 ex-Chase stamps from plate 5L -- I found another couple of dozen (in the aggregate) randomly scattered across 8 of the other plates.

Once I realized what I had -- I started to research the provenance of the ex-Chase platings and discovered the following:

-- Following Chase's death -- the entire set of Chase plate reconstructions was sold intact as lot #14 in a Samuel Paige auction on 12/8/1961 -- hammered down for $1,500. YEP -- you read that correctly -- $1,500 for all 2,600 stamps intact on Chases original plating sheets. As an aside -- after adjusting for inflation -- $1,500 in 1961 would be the equivalent of roughly $13,875 in today's dollars. What a steal by today's philatelic market standards !!!

-- The next time any of the ex-Chase photo stamps appeared at auction -- at least that I could find -- was in a 5/22/2007 Matthew Bennett auction (sale # 315 -- lot # 1080) -- which described the lot as a complete plating -- of which 280 of the "dull reds" and 275 of the "orange browns" were "THE" stamps from the Chase photos -- and with the entire plating mounted on "Chases original plating sheets" -- except for plate 3 which was mounted on a "copy" of Chase's plating sheet. The prices realized show that the lot went "unsold". Interestingly, this lot was re-offered roughly five years later -- in a 2/28/2012 Matthew Bennett auction (sale # 340 -- lot # 73) -- at which time it hammered down for $33,350.

-- Then there is the celebrated Chase / Card plating that was sold as part of the Wagshal sale by Siegel on 10/21/2010 (sale # 996 -- lot # 3003 -- hammer price $35,000). The Siegel auction description notes that the plating was initially completed by Dr. Chase and purchased by DeVere Card -- who then spent years studying and improving on Dr. Chase's plating, confirming all positions, replacing stamps with better examples as he came across them, and at all times maintaining meticulous accuracy in designating the positions. This is consistent with the photo excerpt in the Siegel catalog of the top half of L1E which shows a fair number of ex-Chase photo stamps -- and it is very probable that, although not pictured on the Siegel catalog, a substantial number of ex-Chase photo stamps are included throughout this plating.

Based upon the timeline that I have been able to reconstruct -- I believe that one possible scenario is that Devere Card purchased the Chase platings in the 1961 Paige sale -- and as Card proceeded to upgrade and replace many of the ex-Chase stamps, he (i.e., Card) sold off / traded the duplicates within his circle of fellow 3-cent students -- which included Phil Rose. I also hypothesize -- that Card, after making substantial progress on his improvements and upgrades, perhaps stripped off what he wanted to keep from Chase's original mounting sheets, remounted the stamps on his own plate grids (i.e., as pictured in the Siegel catalog) -- and then sold the balance of the Chase plating intact to another collector -- who then filled in the empty holes -- and which resulted in the Bennett lot noted above?

But -- then again -- all of this is just wild speculation and my thinking could easily be way off track-- especially since some of the timelines do not fit with Siegel's auction description of the "Chase / Card" plating -- nor do they fit with Wagshal's "unpublished" article wherein he (i.e., Wagshal) tells the story of the "Chase / Card" plating. FYI -- there is a link to Wagshal's unpublished article in Siegel's online auction catalog for sale # 996, lot 3003.

Enough of my rambling on this subject for now -- but if anybody out there has anything to add to the above timeline, any additional thoughts or information is appreciated.

Regards // ioagoa
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
United States
2498 Posts
Posted 12/03/2021   11:32 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add txstamp to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
ioagoa - thanks for the history on the Chase platings. Very interesting stuff.
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
Learn More...
United States
74 Posts
Posted 12/03/2021   11:42 am  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Harper1249 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
As a very inexperienced user of the vertically-compressed image technique and, if I'm not mistaken, the most recent to try and use it several minutes ago, it is my opinion that the image I've posted below is 52R5E. (I know... a weak attempt at comedy)

Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
United States
1919 Posts
Posted 12/03/2021   8:17 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Classic Coins to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
ioagoa, Thanks so much for taking the time to summarize your knowledge and hypotheses on the history of the distribution of the stamps from the Chase reconstruction. It's fascinating to me, having acquired the Chase Smithsonian prints over 20 years ago and having used them heavily for decades.

Thanks also for sharing your images of these ex-Chase stamps, as they are museum-caliber pieces of postal history, and seeing them in 1200-DPI color is a real treat!
Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Pillar Of The Community
Learn More...
United States
1919 Posts
Posted 12/04/2021   4:12 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Classic Coins to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
Hi Harper1249,

Well done! Everything checks out for position 52R5E; in particular, the distinctive guide dot.

Since the image of your stamp shows clear signs that it was warped when imaged, I'm surprised that you were satisfied with the compressed-image technique. As has been discussed earlier in this topic, images of warped or bent stamps can result in false negatives when the images are compressed and compared with images of stamps that weren't warped.

The first image below illustrates how warping can induce unnatural curves in the side frame lines when the image is resized vertically. On your stamp, there appears to be a big curve at left, and some small curves at right that are caused by paper bends rather than recutting anomalies.

The second image show how the characteristics of the bottom frame line of the adjoining stamp above (42R5E) were very helpful in identifying the position, as the BFL shows a tiny thin segment below the N of CENTS with very thick segments on adjacent sides, as overlaid on another image of 42R5E-52R5E.

I think it would be interesting to see how your stamp would look if it was soaked and pressed, then re-scanned.

Nice stamp, by the way.


Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Valued Member
Learn More...
United States
74 Posts
Posted 12/04/2021   9:24 pm  Show Profile Bookmark this reply Add Harper1249 to your friends list  Get a Link to this Reply
I started out with the intent of using the compression technique and went to my downloaded Chase images (the one's from Flickr that are of the entire plates) to find the position I wanted to compare/compress. While doing this I noticed I could quickly scan through all of the rows with guide dots and was able to identify candidates that had a guide dot similar to the one on my specimen. Started looking at all plates with two inner lines and ended up with several decent candidates on 5e.

So I didn't really end up using compression technique on this one. I'm glad because I had not even thought about the stamp not being flat on the scanner bed. I imagine that curve would have made it almost impossible to plate correctly. Definitely something I will pay more attention to in the future.

I also wanted to confirm with you all that the TLB and URDB are recut with one line at top. I concluded that they are, so that also helped me narrow down the plates on which to look.

Send note to Staff  Go to Top of Page
Page: of 126 Previous TopicReplies: 1,882 / Views: 83,221Next Topic  
Previous Page | Next Page
 
To participate in the forum you must log in or register.


Go to Top of Page
Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Stamp Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2022 Stamp Community Family - All rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Stamp Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited.
Privacy Policy / Terms of Use    Advertise Here
Stamp Community Forum © 2007 - 2022 Stamp Community Forums
It took 0.42 seconds to lick this stamp. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.05